Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Cory's Corner: Packers should keep eight WRs

By Category

Cory's Corner: Packers should keep eight WRs

Easily the toughest Packers’ position battle during this training camp is wide receiver.

Green Bay is deep at wideout this year because it has a quartet of proven guys. Jordy Nelson, Davante Adams, Randall Cobb and Geronimo Allison round out the top four. After that it gets murky and depends on other factors.

Trevor Davis and Jeff Janis both have excellent speed and both can be utilized on special teams. Davis was so determined to become a returner that he sent Packers special teams coordinator Ron Zook tapes of him returning kicks in the offseason. And Janis is a solid gunner on special teams and would be a welcome addition to a unit that is very green.

However, neither is particularly strong at wide receiver. Davis has trouble getting off the line of scrimmage and Janis still shows confusion with route running and/or the playbook. And that’s why the Packers recently are trying to expand Allison’s understanding of special teams. If they can mold Allison into an average gunner, there’s no way Janis cracks the roster.

Then there are the rookies, who have plenty of promise. Malachi Dupre has had arguably the best camp among rookie wideouts thus far. Obviously, all that could change after the seventh rounder from LSU was concussed with a helmet-to-helmet hit last week and still remains in concussion protocol. DeAngelo Yancey led the Packers’ skill players with 31 snaps in the first preseason game last week Thursday. The coaching staff obviously likes his hands and his route running — which was criticized coming out of Purdue — has improved since coming to Green Bay.

But the diamond in the rough is an undrafted free agent. Michael Clark played three seasons of college hoops before transferring to Marshall to play football. Last year, his raw athletic ability was what stood out as he became the team’s third leading receiver. And now, in his second straight year of playing organized football, he’s fighting for a job on the Packers.

“He’s a basketball players who’s trying to figure out route running and spacing and being sudden, but he has those ‘wow’ moments in practice,” said Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers.

Clark’s physical gifts are astonishing. He’s 6-foot-6 with a 33-inch vertical and he can also use his 4.53 40-yard dash time to run right past you. His size is such an asset that LaDarius Gunter got posterized in camp trying to defend a jump ball. Clark appeared to levitate for second, change course and made an incredible catch.

Those are nine guys and there’s no way the Packers are keeping nine guys, especially when it appears certain that they will be keeping three tight ends.

The Packers also have to understand the risk as well. Could they sneak Dupre or Clark onto the practice squad without another team scooping either one up? I would say no, because both have shown plenty of promise in a pass-happy league to be able fight for snaps on a poor team.

The reason the Packers remain consistently solid is because they have shown strategic decision-making when it comes to developmental decisions. This is another huge decision.

If it were me, I would keep eight wideouts and try to put Yancey on the practice squad. He has shown flashes in camp, but hasn’t been nearly as athletic as Dupre or Clark. With Nelson being 32 years old and Adams having a contract year this offseason and Cobb being a free agent next offseason, these youngsters will be the building blocks for the Packers’ receiving future. 


Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (77) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

The TKstinator's picture

Compelling points. I just wonder how lean that would leave the squad at other positions.

TheVOR's picture

I have watched for days while this group of articles talks about the WR's. First off, just because Davis "FINALLY" showed a pulse on a couple of punt returns, shouldn't be why he makes the roster as a WR. He's terrible as a WR. Also, all the other guys mentioned in this article would easily pass thru waivers and fill out a practice squad. Janis is Janis, Mr. "Pre-season" ran an excellent route and caught a TD. Not much else happened there, but I'd make a case that his special teams contributions alone are significant enough that he should make the team as a special teams standout, and not worry about where he falls as a WR. I believe Janis will again make the team. The guy I'm really excited about, is Max McCaffery! That Guy CAN PLAY!! There is a reason he keeps getting balls thrown at him, he knows how to get open, and he doesn't drop passes. The Packers need to assure "THAT GUY" makes the roster. The rest of these guys mentioned in this article are easily transitioned to a practice squad. Max McCaffery won't clear waivers IMO, too many teams with marginal WR depth, plus, he can really play. He reminds me of the birth pangs of another Julian Edelman. If he doesn't make the roster, we're losing perhaps the one guy that shows the most potential impact to the roster. JMO..

Tundraboy's picture

Totally agree. Just don't see any making it to PS. My preferences are McCaffrey, Yancey and Dupree with Janis on ST. Wish we could somehow hold onto Clark, but how?

packerbackerjim's picture

I see McCaffrey as Jordy 2.0. He has the ability to get open, create separation and has good hands. His dad appears to have had a helluva influence on the football smarts of his sons without any of the emotional baggage so many fathers impart.

DThomas's picture

I don't think they can afford to keep 8 WRs on the 53. They may be able to "hide" one or two on IR (obviously not ideal) and keep in mind that once players reach the practice squad they can be bribed - I mean convinced - to stay with the Packers. Of course they have to clear waivers to get to the PS, but once they do, the Packers can raise their salaries to compete with other teams interested in their services. Their obvious ace in the hole is the prospect of the WR eventually playing with the best QB in the league.

With only one cut-down date beginning this season, there will be a ton of players available from the cut-down deadline of 4PM ET on September 2nd until about 1PM on the 3rd when teams can sign players to their practice squads. Raw WRs may have a good chance to make it through waivers.

RCPackerFan's picture

I think they will definitely keep 7. To keep 8 they would be thinner at other positions.
The easiest way to figure out the 53 man roster is to have 25 on offense, 25 on defense and 3 special teams players. Obviously that can change, but its a good way to figure how many roster spots could be available to each position.

If they have 8 WR's the breakdown of the other positions would look something like this.
QB - 2
RB - 4
TE - 3
OL - 8

On the offensive side this could happen. But would they keep an 8th WR over another Defensive player? Possibly?

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Agree, RC: you can't make the case for keeping 8 WRs w/o listing the other positions. I would think that Clark and Max would make it to the PS if they wanted to come back, but that could, indeed hopefully does due to stellar play, change when September rolls around.

RCPackerFan's picture

The one I'm not sure about is Clark. It depends what he puts on tape the next few games. If he goes out and starts to dominate its going to be tough to get him on the PS.
The thing that is different with him is his size and what his abilities are, are very rare. A few years ago we thought we were going to be able to sneak Charles Johnson onto the PS and he was picked up. So you never do know.

McCaffrey while I like him I haven't seen anything special yet. He's very consistent/reliable, just waiting to see something that stands out.

RobinsonDavis's picture

I like how RC set this up for 8, but have to agree 7 is the likely number. But the considerations are so variable at this point with one exhibition game, where many of these guys played against 2nd/3rd tier players and a relatively vanilla defense. IF the decision had to be made today, I would be keeping my original 6 from last year, plus adding somebody that is NOT one dimensional, but could play various positions and fill in on special teams. That player, to me right now, is McCaffrey. Imagine having two of our top 3 receivers hurt again. Who would you want? Pending DuPre's situation, I would place him on IR to be called back, and place Clark and Yancey on the PS.

However, I am not TT and I think TT would stick with his philosophy of protecting his draft choices and place Yancey (and/or DuPre pending IR status) on the roster and NOT dress them game days. He will chance McCaffrey and Clark to the Practice Squad knowing that McCaffrey has been passed up at least twice by other teams, and that Clark is extremely raw in WR skills, but could be brought back on the roster later in the year.

dobber's picture

I could see QB/RB/TE working out that way, but I really think they keep 9 or maybe even 10 OL (depending on injuries or how guys show in camp). I think 8 would be an awfully thin OL group based on the makeup of this line and the fact that Taylor, Linsley, and Evans all have contracts coming up at the end of the season.

RCPackerFan's picture

The question with that though, is who are your 9th and 10th OL? Are they any more worthy of being on the 53 then the 8th WR? On the 46 man roster they rarely have more then 7 OL dressed. Therefore at least 1 of them sits every week. If you have 9-10, then they would be having 2-3 sitting every week. Well what is the difference if its the 8th WR or the 9th OL that is sitting?

Personally I don't think they will keep 8 WR's, just saying that it is a possibility to go along with the article.

I think its greater chances that they keep an extra RB. Remember the problems they have had at RB the last couple of years. With Ty being our top guy, we still don't know much about him as a RB. And with all of our backups being rookies, they may want to keep them all not knowing who will emerge as the season goes on.

RobinsonDavis's picture

I totally agree Dobber, with Barclay and Patrick as our interior back-ups to fill this out to 9 (pending Barclay's injury). However if Barclay is out, I currently do not see any guard worthy of placing on the active 53.

Tundraboy's picture

Something about Clark makes me think we will lose him like Johnson except he may be much better.

RCPackerFan's picture

I think a lot depends on what happens during these next 3 games. If he flashes a lot of potential, I can see someone signing him.
I agree that I think he has a higher upside then Johnson. He has more to learn, but a higher upside.

RobinsonDavis's picture

Another way to look at this would be to ask yourself, "If you are keeping Davis and Janis, due to their potential to impact a game or two, how could you not keep Clark for the same reason? " A man who could confidently pull down a high pass across the back of the end zone, or across the first down line could be a huge benefit. Packer fans have become accustom to some Hail Mary heroics. Imagine Clark, Allison, Janis and Bennett going up for "jump ball." To counter this thought and my true point of view, is that you can only have so many "one dimensional players" on the roster. ...However, I do believe Tundra makes a great point and provides basis for what many of us are thinking.

GBPDAN1's picture

Allison hasn't shown much in camp so far, maybe he'll be cut? Or, maybe traded for a 7th rd pick? There's definitely going to be some tough choices

Grandfathered's picture

I was thinking that Allison may have a lower ceiling and might not last. He has good hands and good in finding the ball in space but would he ever be better than #4? He hurt himself with the suspension. I would not be so bold as to proclaim his roster spot a given.

Nick Perry's picture

Keeping 8 is a stretch as RC pointed out above. I would think they could sneak Clark on the PS, Yancy and Dupre are another story. I'm a huge fan of Dupre and would hate to see GB try and sneak him on the PS. Yancy showed in the preseason game what he excels at, catching the deep ball.

Nelson, Adams, Cobb are all locks. As much as I hate to say it, I wonder what king of OLB talent the Packers might acquire if they dangled Cobb as trade bait. I love Cobb and actually think he'll have a productive season, but if the Packers could get a decent OLB in a trade I might be able to live with it. His salary is tough to trade though.
As long as Davis doesn't start fumbling the ball, I think he's a lock too. Allison IMO has the #4 WR locked up almost by default. I think he can be just as effective all season this year as he was down the stretch in 2016. I think he showed a lot at the end of the season, especially when plays broke down and he worked back to Rodgers for a completion. Pretty heady play for a rookie. IF he can be average as Cory suggests on ST, Janis would become a casualty.
Yancy and Dupre make it because of being draft picks. I think Dupre could really excel in this offense by next season.

They keep Nelson, Adams, Cobb, Allison, Davis, Yancy, and Dupre. Clark and McCaffrey go to the PS and Janis ends up in where else, Minnesota...UGH!!!!

stockholder's picture

Can't trade Cobb. 12 mil. and you can't depend on whats behind Cobb yet. I don't think Allison is a Lock. He's to slow and is short yardage only. The new TE's make Allison a Cut in my eyes. Not to mention his suspension.

dobber's picture

I don't think a one-game suspension to Allison will harm him too much. Not much different than a guy spraining an ankle in the last PS game, except you get to use his roster spot for a week.

That's what we're essentially looking at here: the Packers can--in effect--keep 8 WR when Allison goes on the suspended/reserve list and they can use his roster spot to keep another WR (the 7 in essence is 8) if they choose.

I'm not sure, though, if they have to keep Allison on the 53 BEFORE they can move him to the suspended list for the first which case, this kinda blows up. But that doesn't mean you don't keep that extra WR, waive your 10th OL, and then resign him immediately when Allison goes to reserve.

Tundraboy's picture

Yup, someone is going to end up in Minnesota. Hate those guys, always trolling for our excess talent.

RobinsonDavis's picture

Jets, Bears, Rams, 49ers and Browns will be watching too.

Nick Perry's picture

If Brock Osweiler can be traded then I'd imagine just about ANYONE could be traded. Cobb catches the ball, he doesn't drop it and that could be worth $12 million a season to some team. I'm not saying it's going to happen or even likely. But you just never know.

RCPackerFan's picture

Like I said above, while we think we will be able to sneak Clark onto the PS, we all thought Charles Johnson was going to sneak onto the PS and stay there. You do risk losing players once they are on the PS.

For Clark, i would say let see what he does the next few preseason games. If he doesn't do much, I'd say his odds grow of making it to the PS. If he shows off his potential I think its going to be tough to sneak him onto the PS.

I think Yancey will be on the 53. Thompson rarely cuts 5th round picks or higher. And Yancey has shown an ability to get deep. While he has had some drops some of that is probably due to him thinking to much. Happens to a lot of rookies.
Dupre I thought was earning a spot until he got hurt. We will have to see how his concussion affects him.

I know one thing. This battle is fun watching!

Spock's picture

RC, your "man" (fan?) crush on Clark is beyond me. I don't think the Packers need to 'sneak' him onto the PS, the author states part of QB1's comments about the 'wow' plays but left off where QB1 also said that Clark was "still raw". A little cherry picking with that! This guy has only WATCHED two NFL games. As Packer fans we are all (well most of us) guilty of over evaluating our preseason roster players. I don't see any reason to keep 8 WR's at all. I like Clark, but I doubt other teams are salivating at a chance to 'snatch' him. :)

RCPackerFan's picture

Hey, I can admit I am very intrigued with Clark. He was one of my most intriguing players that I wanted to see this preseason. Mostly because he is a bit of an unknown and is raw.
The thing with Clark is he is so unique and rare compared to what we have ever had before. His size and basketball background makes him perfect for a redzone target. He has a lot to learn, but you can't take away his physical skills.

He is very raw and that's understandable. I have maintained all along that it would be the best thing for him to spend the season on the PS.
But my point I made above this is what if he starts dominating in the last 3 games? If he performs that well you can't risk losing him.

At the end of camp I would assume he will be put on the PS. But i'm not ruling him out of making the 53 either.

dobber's picture

Didn't we say "there's no way Allison makes the PS...gotta keep him on the 53" a year ago? The Charles Johnson thing is a good foil for that, though. I hate to give DPF too much credit, but as he said, mostly PS players are your own and there aren't a tremendous number of guys who move around. I think the players also recognize that if they go to a new team, they've got to pick up a whole new system and still be impressive enough to stick.

If you like a guy, pay him handsomely to be there (the PS). They gave Rotherham and I can't remember who else essentially rookie paychecks to stay on their PS.

RCPackerFan's picture

Yeah, we probably did. We like to over value our players. But you do have to know how other teams look at your players as well.. You can't automatically assume that they will sneak to the PS.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Dobber, IIRC, the rule is Allison goes directly to the reserve suspended list and does not pass through waivers. There is no chance of GB losing its rights to Allison.

Some WR might get a 1 real NFL game try-out. If the Seattle game is a tight game, then GB uses as its 4th WR (or the guy who rotates in to give someone a breather) the player (insert name) GB thinks helps us the most to win. If it is a blowout, then maybe keep playing Davis if he is having a nice game, or substitute the guy who GB has to make a decision on (insert different name) and give him some significant snaps to see what he can do.

stockholder's picture

No to 8. No to Clark. PS. I believe the Packers keep Janis and Davis. ( Regardless of their routes. ) The players that have to show more are Allison and McCaffrey. Are they the future? NO! IS Janis or Davis.? While janis has the size,speed, and is the packers best gunner. I say they keep him. Is he a reliable WR? No. But he still continues to improve. So my 4 locks are Nelson,Cobb,Adams,Janis. I don't believe Allison can beat the punt returns of Davis. Or McCaffrey's speed. Can McCaffrey show he's better? Yes. The 6 WRs will be Nelson,Cobb,Adams,Janis,McCaffrey,Davis. And if they don't carry 3 rookie Rbs. Pencil in Dupre as your 7th WR.

PackEyedOptimist's picture

I agree with your list, currently, except I'd see Yancey as the 7th. That can, of course, change. I also disagree with your statement that McCaffrey is "not the future." I think that's draft bias. Max is younger and faster and just as big as most of the WRs, plus he is a favorite of the entire QB room because he gets open and catches everything. I could see a group of Adams, Davis and McCaffrey as the starting three in a couple of years.

dobber's picture

Not to be the naysayer, here--well, OK, I've been the naysayer on this trend for a couple weeks, now--but do we really expect ALL of these guys to make it to the cutdown healthy?

RobinsonDavis's picture


PackEyedOptimist's picture

It's hard to predict who will be put on the PS, and it's even harder to predict who will be poached off the PS by other teams. I'm guessing that at least one of our WRs-of-interest will end up on injured reserve, but we're bound to lose one or two to poaching. I hate that every year, but it will happen.

dobber's picture

True...but essentially "keeping 8" is a possibility with Allison's suspension. You get a one-week reprieve before you need to decide who goes.

4zone's picture

I'd like a new pickup too but that ain't happening. Attrition may have some say in the process but with the TEs we have now, I'm not sure we keep 7, let alone 8.

But hey, if they are among the 53 best... Not a bad problem to have. Let's see after the next two games where things sit.

Handsback's picture

If the Packers play with two TEs, then that's two WRs on the field. Which may be around 50% of the time this year. That would mean 6 guys sitting on their duffs contributing on STs only. If they go full bore and play 5 WRs at one time that's still three guys on the bench. You don't build a team around guys sitting on the bench. There will be 6 maybe 7 WRs kept. The rest will be on the PS or IR and yes other teams will poach them. You can't keep all of your propects.

dobber's picture

This is a great point: we'll be talking about these wonderfully talented WR who end up being healthy scratches on game day.

Jersey Al's picture

I'd say this is the most realistic viewpoint I've seen here on the subject.

stockholder's picture

Very True. But the game of football has showed the importance of "field position". Field position is everything now. It needs good gunners and return men. It's not a "bench" approach. Games are lost because of poor special Teams and how far to the goal post. The Wr must remain a position of All things considered.

Since '61's picture

Given the status of the Packers OL I would want to keep more than 8 OLs. I would say 9 OL at least. If we are unable to protect AR effectively it won't matter how many WRs we have and we can only put a maximum of 5 on the field at one time and I doubt if we're going to take Bennett and Monty off the field to get 5 WRs on the field. Keep 7 WRs. Remember that we have Monty as an RB but he is essentially a WR on passing downs either in the slot or coming out of the backfield.

Thanks, Since '61

RCPackerFan's picture

When the 53 comes around I think you will be right.

Though I'm not ruling out them keeping 8 WR's completely.

The next question that I do have though is will they end up keeping 5 RB's and 8 OL instead?
Would they keep all 3 rookie RB's or would they keep 2 of them and keep Kerridge who has been said to have had a good camp.

Since '61's picture

RC - I think that they keep 4 RBs on the 53 and one on the PS. Monty, Rip, Williams and one other on the 53. Kerridge or the other rookie to the PS. But who knows. Unless the RBs start making plays in the remaining preseason games why keep 5 on the 53? OLs and WRs are more important to a passing team like the Packers. Thanks, Since '61

RCPackerFan's picture

Yeah, I think your right, but now today at practice Montgomery isn't practicing. They may ultimately decide to keep 5.

My guess right now is that they keep Montgomery, Williams, Jones and Ripkowski.

Spock's picture

Cory, "If they can mold Allison into an average gunner, there’s no way Janis cracks the roster". Ah, no. Janis may not be a good receiver but he is WAY above being an 'average' gunner. He is also a pretty good kickoff returner. This statement makes zero sense to me. The Packers kept many players for years based almost entirely on their ST prowess. Janis is not going anywhere. And IMHO there is no way in (heck) that the Packers kept 8 receivers after acquiring two good TE's in FA. That makes no sense at all, unless they were all ST demons, and they are not. I agree with '61 above: far more likely to keep additional OL.

marpag1's picture

I don't know why anyone would think that Allison might become even an average gunner, anyway. For some odd reason, people seem to think that Allison is a physical freak. That's hardly true. He's tall, slow, relatively skinny and not particularly explosive. That's not what being a gunner is all about.

Last year Allison played a grand total of THREE snaps on special teams... all year. In other words, the coaching staff saw virtually no use for him as a special teamer at all.

dobber's picture


Jersey Al's picture

While I agree with you that he isn't the gunner type, I think he didn't play much special teams because by the time he was added to the team, they had their special teams units set, he was very inexperienced in that department plus he hadn't had any practice on it. Rather than try to turn him into a special teams player as the Packers were fighting to make the playoffs, the Packers smartly decided to let him avoid it till next camp.

marpag1's picture

I'm sure that may have entered into the coaches' thinking. But compare Allison's story to a guy like Makinton Dorleant.

Allison was on PS from the start of the season. He was added to the roster for 10 games and yet played only 3 ST snaps.

Dorleant was brought up from the practice squad before week 13 and was active for only 4 games. Yet Dorleant took 45 ST snaps during that time.

If Allison would have been "thrown into the ST fire," it was much MORE that way for Dorleant... yet the coaches threw him right in. It's hard not to conclude that there is a simple reason for this: the Packers thought Dorleant could be effective, but they didn't feel that about Allison.

Jersey Al's picture

Good info. I was trying to come up with a possible explanation of why they didn't use Allison, but your example blows a big whole in that one. Nice job!

dobber's picture

Janis will be playing NFL football in 2017...if not for the Packers, someone else will scoop him off the waiver wire immediately. As a gunner, he can step in and contribute to someone else's crappy ST immediately, thus earning his keep while he fails to learn someone else's complex offense.

marpag1's picture

I wonder if there has ever been a year in which fans did not egregiously overvalue bottom-feeding wide receivers. I'm guessing no.

dobber's picture

You're my hero...

Tundraboy's picture

True. Each year we are all hoping for that Diamond. With ARod as the QB that would be a dream.

Spock's picture

Marpag1 ^^^This^^^^. LOL

Norm's picture

Is Tori Gurley in the Hall of Fame yet?

Jersey Al's picture

That's the guy that got me to learn my lesson...

lou's picture

Chances are very slim 8 WR's are on the 53, if that were the case only 2 QB's would be on the 53. If they want to move Hundley before next season and they like Callahan as much as McCarthy seems to indicate he would be the next "Tolzien" once they move Hundley and give them that type of comfort level. Callahan was claimed off waivers when they let him go last year, chances are the young WR's would have a better chance of clearing waivers and could be put on the practice squad. In reference to trading Cobb, Ted Thompson has made 2 trades in 11 years, lets be realistic.

Tundraboy's picture

I'm waiting for some team to have a sudden dire need for a QB so we could bolster the D in a trade, Hundley for an OLB. Draft isn't going to do it any time soon.

Christopher Gennaro's picture

While I agree there is little chance they keep 8 wrs, the whole Callahan being claimed is interesting. You are right he did get claimed not once but twice, one of those team being the Browns. What happen he was dropped both times, and ended up back with the Packers. I like what I have seen from Callahan, but if he is the future backup, why didn't at least one of those team, at least keep on their roster? My guess while a talented player, he is replaceable.

PatrickGB's picture

It depends on who Aaron likes best. It also depends on special teams play. With longer punts near sideline and great hang time gunners are not as important. I would not be shocked if we kept only five. Three tight ends and two full backs. I expect three quarterbacks. That leaves little room for marginal wide receivers.

dobber's picture

Something that tangentially impacts this thread was posted by where they speculate Richard Rodgers is one of the more tradeable players in the league at this point due to the Packers TE acquisitions and "depth" at WR.

We give Rodgers a hard time, but he has had a couple productive seasons catching the ball (50 catches, 8 TDs). Would be nice to net something in return...

Spock's picture

Wow, dobber. I did not see that coming! Interesting article, thanks for the link.

hodge555's picture

I think Richard Rodgers might well not make the team this year. If we can get something for him in a trade then great but I suspect that will be unlikely.
He is realistically our 3rd TE, so unlikely to play much (unless there are injuries) and set to have a cap hit of just over $1.9 this year (last year of rookie deal).
Remember we only kept 2 TE's last year (Cook & Rodgers) as we dropped Purello.

Tundraboy's picture

Nice problem to have. Tough decisions to make between some who have skills we need this year and others who can develop into replacements down the road. McCaffrey 's sure hands and Yancey' s deep abilities are elements I would like to see sooner than later.

rodgersrules's picture

I just really hope that Dupre is okay. Personally, I think he has huge upside. And I think the guy who may actually end up being the odd man out is Allison. Simply not nearly as athletic, or as fast, as the other options. I know he came through with some nice games at the end of last year but if he could win a WR job on its own, they wouldn't be trying to figure out a way he can contribute on special teams.

Tundraboy's picture

Think your right on Allison.

RobinsonDavis's picture

Agree with Dupre comments, but would point out that the intangible with Allison is that he does get open, and has AR's confidence. The same cannot be said of Davis, Janis, McCaffrey, or any of the rookies as of yet.

GBPDUKE's picture

With how mad McCarthy got last year when they tried to move Callahan, I would say that they keep three QB's. Along with 4 RB's, which two of them can catch out of the backfield. No need to keep 7 WR's.

Couch Cleats's picture

This is a fun discussion. It's awesome to have such a competitive group at the WR position. I think it's too early yet though. Let's wait and see what happens for the rest of camp and preseason games. Someone may go down with an injury.

Personally, I would rather go with the speed and potential of the rookie group over Allison. To me, he's just a guy and gets opportunities because he's on a team with so many other weapons to cover.

I agree the Clark hype is out of hand for this stage of the game, but it is exciting to have someone with Freak Show potential at the position.

6'6" with a 33" vertical and speed. He has a massive catch radius and I think the fact that he has hardly played any football is a positive not a negative. People with no experience don't just walk into the NFL and start having success unless they have unique talent.

I don't see him staying on the PS. Can you imagine the impact he could make on an average offense with a B or C level quarterback in the red zone? We get to watch Rodgers throw dimes to diving receivers down there like it's no big deal. Other QB's don't have that option. A jump ball to a giraffe with a massive wing span is a dream for everyone else.

Other GM's with a thin receiving group will drool over the chance to be a hero by picking up a guy like that. If he puts a couple of "wow moments" on film for the rest of the league in the upcoming preseason games I think he's going to force their hand.

Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with them cutting a draft pick at WR this year if others are showing more promise.

Tundraboy's picture

Freak show potential. Love it. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing cutting Allison for the same reasons.

Norm's picture

"Other GM's with a thin receiving group will drool over the chance to be a hero by picking up a guy like that. "

The thing is, they all did have that chance, he was undrafted.

A Pickled Packer's picture

Didn't we have a receiver called Gurley who was tall too but we let go. I remember reading simialr things about him. What makes this Clarke kid any better? Did we cut Gurley outright or did we try to stash him on the practice squad and he got picked up?

Jersey Al's picture

Gurley went to the PS, got claimed and repeated that cycle with several teams, signed as FA with several teams. Didn't stick anywhere.

al bundy's picture

Good arguements people. Im thinking injuries will keep the number lower. They are droppng lie flies on defence. Could cut a fb, te, janis, qb t make aome room.

flackcatcher's picture

Lots of smart comments. Fun reading them. Thanks guys.

Jersey Al's picture

And civilized too. It IS possible!

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets, Ticket King


"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"